General Poker Discussion Poker Forums

TB and I mentioned that we don't have any concerns about PLAYING AGAINST THEM only. That was the point. Bots obv do hurt the poker economy but that's another issue.

The quote was "Seriously, so what?" which implies that there's nothing to be concerned with at all about this. If that wasn't his (or your) intent, fine, but there's no other way for me to read it. I realize he went on to say he's not concerned about playing against them, but his "so what" implies there's no problem whatsoever, when bots do create an undeniably real problem.

Regardless, you are both IMO wrong if you don't think they take money out of the system. They absolutely do. People wouldn't be running these bots if they didn't turn a profit after rakeback. And, I think you're also wrong not having concerns playing against them. Can you beat them? Maybe, I don't know. Could you make more money if a fish is in their seat? Undoubtedly. Opportunity cost matters.

I'm pretty sure there aren't many if any profitable bots above 5nl NLHE 6-max, and since we are aspiring to be the best poker players we can be and climb the ladder. The impact that bots have I think is minimal, unless of course I am mistaken and there are bots crushing 25nl+.

where is neo when you need him

I'm pretty sure there aren't many if any profitable bots above 5nl NLHE 6-max, and since we are aspiring to be the best poker players we can be and climb the ladder. The impact that bots have I think is minimal, unless of course I am mistaken and there are bots crushing 25nl+.

That's not the issue. "Being the best player you can be" is all good and fine. We all try that and a lot of us are on a good way to achieve that.

However Tom Dwan and Phil Ivey can't make a dime playing poker if no one has a dime to gamble. That's exaggerated of course, but I hope you get my point. Every single penny a bot draws out of the system is a penny I can't win, no matter how good the best player I can be is.

I'm pretty sure there aren't many if any profitable bots above 5nl NLHE 6-max, and since we are aspiring to be the best poker players we can be and climb the ladder. The impact that bots have I think is minimal, unless of course I am mistaken and there are bots crushing 25nl+.

That network of bots in PS were beating NL50 and NL100 for about 1bb/100.

Some of you are saying that having a bot is bad because a fish could be sitting there, but there could also be a good reg there who beats NL100 at 5bb/100. So I rather have an 8/7 bot who is giving me some of the money he takes from fish, instead of having a reg that not only will take that fish' money but mine as well.

I'm pretty sure there aren't many if any profitable bots above 5nl NLHE 6-max, and since we are aspiring to be the best poker players we can be and climb the ladder. The impact that bots have I think is minimal, unless of course I am mistaken and there are bots crushing 25nl+.

This may or may not be true, but people playing as high as 100NL did get refunds according to the 2p2 thread. Whether the bots are as prevalent at the upper end of the micros is certainly debatable, but I would conclude that they were (and most certainly still are) at those levels, which, as I stated in the other thread, is bad for the games.

Also, remember that a bot doesn't need to beat a stake to be profitable after rakeback.

I'm not saying I like bots, I was just saying. I prefer that everyone would be a human, games would be much softer. What about the sites asking for a captcha from time to time or something similar? Maybe this would be bad for the fish, as they would now get scared that there are bots around?

That would only be true IF they took money out of the system.

I'm pretty sure they are. On twoplustwo, people playing as high as 100nl rush have been getting refunds, so they must have been down against the bots. And twoplustwo posters probably aren't the worst players.

I think rush poker on FTP proved to be a big breeding ground for bots. Its a perfect environment for them and really hard for the player base (in NL for sure) to catch on to them. Apparently a bunch of the bots "sat out" to fold as they couldnt quite handle the quickfold stuff (others could).

I know for a fact I saw a few players in 25/50NL rush that would sit out when action was on them, then Id see them at the next table raising right away...

Its also hard to exploit a bot in rush unless you draw a perfect seat on them, like BB to their B. They can put in mass volume just playing the nuts....

Bots for sale are scams, that's the good thing, so you can just consider bots a bunch of nitty regulars. Check this new bot, I'm sure this will make you rich in no time: http://www.roulettebotpro.com/

I think rush poker on FTP proved to be a big breeding ground for bots. Its a perfect environment for them and really hard for the player base (in NL for sure) to catch on to them. Apparently a bunch of the bots "sat out" to fold as they couldnt quite handle the quickfold stuff (others could).

Interesting. I remember seeing this several times.

Some of you are saying that having a bot is bad because a fish could be sitting there, but there could also be a good reg there who beats NL100 at 5bb/100. So I rather have an 8/7 bot who is giving me some of the money he takes from fish, instead of having a reg that not only will take that fish' money but mine as well.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. You are more likely to have more fish at your table under the no bot scenario, where you are likely to have fewer fish at your table under the bot scenario. Remember, the number of regs doesn't change when you remove the bots from the system, so you will have a higher percentage of fish on your tables statistically as a result. I'd prefer more fish, but if you'd prefer bots, so be it

EDIT: Also, I also think you are overestimating the edge a reg has on you and underestimating the relative skill differential between you and a bot.

Bots for sale are scams, that's the good thing, so you can just consider bots a bunch of nitty regulars. Check this new bot, I'm sure this will make you rich in no time: http://www.roulettebotpro.com/

Awesome!

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. You are more likely to have more fish at your table under the no bot scenario, where you are likely to have fewer fish at your table under the bot scenario. Remember, the number of regs doesn't change when you remove the bots from the system, so you will have a higher percentage of fish on your tables statistically as a result. I'd prefer more fish, but if you'd prefer bots, so be it

Read my next post where I clarify the situation I also prefer the no bot scenario and I wish the sites took more drastic measures against cheating. I would also love to see online poker regulated in a way that stealing money from there has the same consequences as stealing from anywhere else, I don't know if this will ever happen though.

That network of bots in PS were beating NL50 and NL100 for about 1bb/100.

Where did you get this from? Do you have a link?